Our View: Finish Dakota Access Pipeline

The United States has 72,000 miles of crude oil pipeline. Yet each proposal to add 1,000 miles or so is viewed by opponents in almost apocalyptic terms.

Activists spent years defeating the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have transported oil from western Canada and eastern Montana to the Gulf of Mexico.

Now the focus is on the Dakota Access Pipeline, a mostly built line running diagonally through the Dakotas and Iowa on its way to Illinois. It would be the first major pipeline bringing access to the Bakken oil fields that have been so much a part of America’s energy production renaissance.

On Sunday, the Army Corps of Engineers said it would not approve an easement to cross the Missouri River at the Standing Rock Sioux reservation, where protesters have been holed up for months. The decision by the Obama administration effectively punts the issue to the Trump administration, which would do well to explore whether there are less controversial ways to complete the pipeline.

For the Standing Rock Sioux, it is understandable that they would not want a pipeline crossing a major river just upstream of their reservation (and traversing land outside of the reservation said to contain sacred burial sites).

Continue Reading >>

MAIN Coalition Members and Advisors Release Statement on Administration’s Decision Not to Issue Final Easement

Following the Obama Administration’s decision to not grant an easement for the Dakota Access Pipeline at Lake Oahe, MAIN Coalition members and advisors issued the following statements:

Coalition Advisors

Ret. Major General James “Spider” Marks

“Today’s decision by the Obama Administration to deny the easement for the Dakota Access Pipeline is a politically motivated action with a complete disregard for the rule of law and the regulatory process that was so carefully followed over two years.

To deny the easement, based on the influence and unlawful actions of the unpeaceful protesters I saw firsthand is baffling and unlike anything I have ever seen.

Today’s decision will only embolden, empower, and engage future activity on other major infrastructure projects and create detrimental consequences for our nation’s energy security, economy, and infrastructure development for years to come.”

Brigham McCown, Former PHMSA Administrator

“As a supporter of the institutional process, I am disheartened to see the length to which this current administration has chosen to politically manipulate and undermine mature programs administered by the career civil service.

There is simply no justification for today’s decision which undermines every single proposed infrastructure project across America. The signal it sends is tragic, that the government can change its mind after a project has been approved and construction has started. This ill-conceived notion says that the rules of the game are subject to manipulation without recourse, at least until a new administration takes office.

The decision to review alternate routes was already rejected, and the government offers no justification for rescinding its previous findings of no adverse impacts and it yet another example of government obstruction of key infrastructure projects which would have increased energy safety and environmental stewardship.”

Coalition Members

Ed Wiederstein, Chairman of the MAIN Coalition

“It is extremely disappointing that the administration has decided to take this course of action on what should be a mere formality for a project that is more than 90 percent complete.

Dakota Access has worked for more than two years to identify the safest, most sensible route for the pipeline and once operational, this project will be among the most technologically advanced pipelines in the world.

Instead this purely political decision has undermined our nation’s regulatory structure and sent a chilling message to those looking to invest in our nation’s infrastructure network.”

Bill Gerhard, President of the Iowa State Building and Construction Trades Council

“It is completely unacceptable that the administration has denied the easement on the final, 1,000 foot section of an 1,200 mile project. This project was denied because of special interest opponents who have already stated their mission is far greater than this particular project. And the reality is this decision will have implications far beyond than those who are protesting it’s development.

The over $1 billion private investment in Iowa alone is critical to modernizing our nation’s energy transportation network and Iowa stands to benefit greatly in the years to come from the millions in added tax revenues during construction that is already being generated. The skilled tradesmen from many communities along the pipeline’s route already preparing for the coming economic boon that will accompany the construction phase of the project were dealt a serious blow by this decision.”

Andy Peterson, President of the North Dakota Chamber of Commerce

“The refusal to grant an easement for the Dakota Access Pipeline in North Dakota by the federal government is deeply concerning for future business and infrastructure investments in our state.

Despite receiving approvals from each state along the route, a finding of No Significant Impact by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, court rulings from the District and Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and the support of thousands of individuals in the business, agriculture, and labor communities, political decisions ultimately overrode informed judgement.

If private companies cannot rely on the government to enforce the rule of law, and ensure that lawful investments can be carried through despite two full years of governmental review and approvals, then there is very dangerous precedent being set by the Obama Administration.”

Ron Ness, President of the North Dakota Petroleum Council

“The Army Corps of Engineers’ refusal to grant an easement for the Dakota Access Pipeline to cross Lake Oahe is extremely disheartening.

Despite a thorough review by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and an approval by the North Dakota Public Service Commission, political decisions made by the Obama Administration ultimately overruled sound engineering judgment, and will only serve to enflame ongoing tensions in Morton County.

The North Dakota Petroleum Council looks forward to the enforcement of the rule of law and the approval of an easement by the incoming Trump Administration.”

Dawna Leitzke, Executive Director, South Dakota Petroleum and Propane Marketers Association

“The South Dakota Petroleum and Propane Marketers Association is deeply troubled by the refusal to grant the last easement for the Dakota Access Pipeline by the Obama Administration.

This refusal threatens the future of both energy independence and ensuring a low cost of supplying a vital resource that drives our economy from agriculture, to manufacturing, to consumer products and services.

The Dakota Access Pipeline remains a critical investment and we look forward to its approval and completion after the Obama Administration leaves office in a few short weeks.”

Obama Admin. Blocks Dakota Access Pipeline Months After Approving It

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will not be granting the company building the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) the easement it needs to cross the Missouri River, despite the project being nearly complete.

American Indians and environmentalists camped out at the project’s construction site hailed the decision a victory, while Energy Transfer Partners and pipeline supporters are bashing the Corps for reversing its stance on the project.

Army Assistant Secretary for Civil Works Jo-Ellen Darcy said the Corps would not approve the easement based on the need “explore alternate routes” for the pipeline. It’s a stunning reversal from July 2016, when the Corps approved the easement for the project.

Continue Reading >>

MAIN Coalition Statement on Refusal To Grant An Easement at Lake Oahe

Following the Obama Administration’s decision to not grant an easement for the Dakota Access Pipeline at Lake Oahe, MAIN Coalition spokesman Craig Stevens issued the following statement:

“This purely political decision flies in the face of common sense and the rule of law.  Unfortunately, it’s not surprising that the President would, again, use executive fiat in an attempt to enhance his legacy among the extreme Left.  That the President continues to believe that he is above the law is simply un-American and it is this arrogance that working class Americans soundly rejected on November 8.  For millions of hard-working people across the heartland, January 20 cannot come soon enough.

“President Obama’s decision not to issue the final easement is a rejection of the entire regulatory and judicial system, as well as the scores of Army Corps of Engineers and civil servants who toiled for more than 800 days to ensure the process was followed correctly, in accordance with the law.

“The pipeline – at no point – crosses the Standing Rock Sioux tribe’s reservation, is collocated with a three-decades old natural gas pipeline, and has received all requisite state and federal approvals.  The only remaining piece of the 1,172-mile puzzle was the final easement for a 1,000 foot portion abutting Lake Oahe.  There is no reasonable logical, factual, environmental, or scientific reason for this not to be issued – in fact the Army Corps of Engineers had already recommended the approval of the easement.

“With President-elect Trump set to take office in just a few weeks, we are hopeful that this is not the final word on the Dakota Access Pipeline.”

-###-

Statement from Ret. Major General Spider Marks on Veterans Joining DAPL Protests

Ret. Major General James “Spider” Marks issued the following statement Saturday in response to reports that a number of veterans will be traveling to North Dakota next week to join protesters opposing the Dakota Access Pipeline:

“As people, including some veterans, are traveling to North Dakota this weekend, I would urge all sides to respect and honor our shared military service.  Veterans are represented throughout local law enforcement, among pipeline construction workers, as well as the protesters.  All of us, no doubt, have lost friends or colleagues and spilled our own blood to protect the American freedoms that we all cherish.

“I am concerned that the protests have grown, and will continue to grow, more violent and targeted against law enforcement and pipeline construction personnel and equipment.  We all respect the right to be heard, but I implore all protesters to demonstrate in a peaceful and lawful manner.  As brother and sister veterans, we should respect each other and our shared sacrifice.”

-###-

North Dakota Congressman Offers Harsh Rebuke of Pipeline Critics

North Dakota Congressman Kevin Cramer offered a lengthy, detailed response to Dakota Access Pipeline critics during a Friday morning speech on the House floor. Cramer, an advocate for American energy independence, addressed both the Obama Administration’s inaction and the unlawful protest activities.

“Mr. Speaker, for more than 3 months, thousands of rioters disguising  themselves as prayerful people, peaceful protesters, have illegally  camped on Federal land owned or at least managed by the U.S. Army Corps  of Engineers, owned by the taxpayers of this country. … At the center of this issue is an administration that refuses–not just refuses to follow the rule of law, but enables and encourages the breaking of the law, beginning with the fact that thousands of illegal protesters are allowed to camp, to trespass on federally owned land.”

Cramer, who served as one of North Dakota’s utility regulators for nine years before being elected to Congress, went on to emphasize that pipelines like Dakota Access are the safest, most efficient, and environmentally friendly way to transport our energy resources. Without the pipeline, Bakken producers will still send product to market, but will be forced to rely on less reliable alternatives like railcars and trucks, Cramer added.

In addition, Cramer strongly disputed misguided rumors about decisions made during the routing of the pipeline.

“[The Dakota Access Pipeline] was always planned for this location for a very good reason, Mr. Speaker. … The main reason this route was chosen was because it was the least intrusive on the environment, on waterways, on private property, and on cultural resources. The other locations that were under consideration that were not  chosen crossed many more bodies of water and were much closer to many  wells and cultural resources and very important historical resources.  It was 48 extra miles of previously undisturbed field areas. This is  and was the best route because it is an existing corridor. In this same  corridor, there is already a natural gas pipeline. There is already a  large electric transmission line. That is why it was chosen.”

Cramer concluded by discussing the impact the months long protest is having in North Dakota, noting that the state government has had to borrow $17 million to cover law enforcement costs.

Snopes: Bismarck Never Rejected Dakota Access Route

Respected fact checking website, Snopes.com responded on Wednesday to misguided rumors that the Dakota Access Pipeline was rerouted around Bismarck as a result of local opposition.

CLAIM: The Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) was re-routed through the Standing Rock Reservation after Bismarck’s mostly-white residents refused to allow it near their water supply.

WHATS TRUE: The U.S Army Corps of Engineers originally considered a Dakota Access Pipeline route north of Bismarck but abandoned the idea, citing eleven miles of additional pipeline length and dozens more crossings.

WHATS FALSE: “Mostly white” residents of Bismarck did not refuse to accept the threat to their water supply, and the project was not subsequently forced upon tribes at Standing Rock because white people rejected the risk.

The post goes on to cite an article in the Bismarck Tribune that explains why the current route was always the preferred route:

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers evaluated the Bismarck route and concluded it was not a viable option for many reasons. One reason mentioned in the agency’s environmental assessment is the proximity to wellhead source water protection areas that are avoided to protect municipal water supply wells.

In addition, the Bismarck route would have been 11 miles longer with more road crossings and waterbody and wetland crossings. It also would have been difficult to stay 500 or more feet away from homes, as required by the North Dakota Public Service Commission, the corps states.

The Bismarck route also would have crossed an area considered by federal pipeline regulators as a “high consequence area,” which is an area determined to have the most significant adverse consequences in the event of a pipeline spill.

Bismarck Mayor Mike Seminary recently echoed these findings, saying that at no point did local officials discuss the alternate route north of the city.

“Bismarck has never been involved in that discussion. Not one policy maker, not one department head, not one city employee has ever been involved in a discussion with regards to a route north of Bismarck …. So move on from that subject. You are wrong and you are creating issues,” Seminary said during a November press conference.

Dakota Access Ensures Costs Remain Low For North Dakota Producers

In an article published in Bloomberg Businessweek, recently reviewed energy and economic analyses point to a significantly reduced cost to ship petroleum by pipeline rather than by railroad or truck. This is important because those few dollars difference in cost to energy companies directly relates to the opportunities for companies to expand operations and hire individuals from engineers to craft trades to develop the infrastructure necessary to develop North Dakota resources.

According to the article, “[u]nlike Texas, which has pumped oil for more than a century and is home to thousands of miles of pipelines, North Dakota never had a reason to build much energy infrastructure. As oil gushed out of remote areas miles from any town or pipeline, wildcatters, middlemen, and traders raced to get it out by truck, train, and barge. By 2015, 800,000 barrels of crude a day was being railed out of North Dakota. Moving oil by train costs a lot more than pumping it through a pipeline, but when world crude prices hovered around $100 a barrel—as they did for several years—there was enough profit to go around. Now that prices have fallen, those transportation costs have become critical. Refineries on the East Coast, once among the biggest buyers of Bakken crude, have reverted to importing foreign oil rather than paying to ship it halfway across the country.”

Despite the massive production available in North Dakota, the high cost of transportation has actually led some American refiners to import foreign oil, rather than use domestic supplies, because of the economic realities.

The key to closing that cost gap and reducing dependence is to construct the infrastructure necessary to make North Dakota oil economically viable for the long-term future. An important part of that infrastructure investment is the Dakota Access Pipeline.

According to data compiled from Valero and Bloomberg Intelligence, current costs to ship Bakken oil to refineries across the United States by rail can range as high as $10 per barrel – at roughly $50 per barrel, that’s 10% of the total price. The estimated cost of delivery of a barrel moved by the Dakota Access pipeline would fall to about $5 per barrel, creating long-term stability for producers, refiners, and ultimately, consumers.

With the development of the Dakota Access Pipeline, transportation costs would essentially be reduced by half. Imagine if you could shave 5% off the cost of a gallon of gas, and ensure that the gallon of gas wasn’t supporting a foreign government. Not only that, but by reducing the cost of transportation, opportunities for production increase allowing more North Dakotans the opportunity to work. Right now North Dakota’s major oil producing counties support on average approximately 10% of the state workforce, and that’s with only 38 oil and gas rigs operating in November of this year. Compare that to more than 200 rigs back in 2014.

Lean operation has made production more efficient, but reducing costs for producers allows for greater development and greater economic opportunity.

Dakota Access Pipeline Update: MAIN Coalition Statement on Protesters

MAIN Coalition spokesman Craig Stevens today issued the following statement in response to reports that a number of veterans will be traveling to North Dakota next week to join protesters opposing the Dakota Access Pipeline:

“It’s important to remember that there are veterans on both sides of this issue who have served honorably to protect Americans’ right to protest, as well as Americans’ right to work and live in a safe and harassment-free environment.  We respect the service of all veterans, yet the notion that some would descend upon Cannon Ball as self-purported ‘human shields’ is both unnerving and unnecessary.  Protesters have had, and taken, the ongoing opportunity to protest for several months.  Only when protesters have broken the law have they been arrested or asked to disperse.

“All Americans have the Constitutionally protected right to peaceably protest.  However, as the weather worsens, emotions rise, and tensions escalate we remain concerned for the safety of law enforcement peacekeepers, protesters, and workers.  We urge the Obama Administration to abide by the rule of law and acknowledge the intensifying situation in Cannon Ball by issuing the already-approved easement for construction abutting Lake Oahe so that life can return to normal in the area.”

-###-

Who are the Dakota Access Pipeline Protesters Standing With?

After being immersed in more than three months of protests and riots over the Dakota Access Pipeline in Morton County, N.D., I feel compelled to share a few general observations.

First, and most aggravating, the reasoning and stated positions of the protesters seem to have little to do with the citizens of Morton County, or even the Standing Rock Sioux tribe. Perhaps they simply did no research, or chose to ignore the facts surrounding the pipeline.

But for many of these radical environmental groups and professional protesters who have come into our county, from everywhere from California to New York, the facts would have ruined a perfectly good protest opportunity. Most never met a protest they didn’t like, and they certainly never let the truth get in the way of their national environmental agenda.

Continue Reading >>